Consumer grievance redressal forum are finished in Government of Uttar Pradesh and in Vindhyachal/Mirzapur division is disfunctional since five years and applications under section 142 of The Electricity Act 2003 is forwarded to M.D. Uttar Pradesh power corporation limited by the chief minister office and concerned instead of taking action files them and Uttar Pradesh regulatory commission misleads the consumers that their petitions are not amenable before it.
27 November 2015
Whether our accountable public functionaries masked with pseudo honesty really advocates transparency and accountability in the system or in schizophrenic way only mislead the citizenry in cryptic style.
With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that if we talk of growing corruption in Uttar Pradesh power corporation limited , then most surprising fact is that after large scale exposure of corruption by S.T.F. , not a single wrongdoer Engineer was put behind the bar. Whether such act of government of Uttar Pradesh is not lowering its credibility in the mind of state citizenry.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Section 142. (Punishment for non-compliance of directions by Appropriate Commission): In case any complaint is filed before the
Appropriate Commission by any person or if that Commission is satisfied that any person has contravened any of the provisions of
this Act or the rules or regulations made thereunder, or any direction issued by the Commission, the Appropriate Commission may
after giving such person an opportunity of being heard in the matter, by order in writing, direct that, without prejudice to any other
penalty to which he may be liable under this Act, such person shall pay, by way of penalty, which shall not exceed one lakh rupees
for each contravention and in case of a continuing failure with an additional penalty which may extend to six thousand rupees for
every day during which the failure continues after contravention of the first such direction.
Whether in the aforesaid act commission means not uttar pradesh electricity regulatory commission but consumer grievance redressal forum which does not exist in the Mirzapur /Vindhyachal division since more than five years.
Original Message From: Dr. Amit Bhargava To: A K Srivastava
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: What is the value of direction of electricity regulatory authority for electri
city companies in the Government of Uttar Pradesh?
If required, the sender of the email may please be informed: That the Commission as per the legal provisions is not empowered to hear consumer grievances. Hence for the resolution of his grievance, he may approach the CGRF (Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum) of his area. The details of the same are available on the UPERC website at the following link –
Hon’ble Sir from the subject of representation even a layman can understand the matter that it relates to function of Electricity Regulatory Commission but aforesaid staffs of commission either really incompetent to understand or mocking in planned way that they are not understanding the contents which is quite common in the system . If the order passed by Uttar Pradesh Regulatory Commission actually followed by the electricity companies , most of the grievances would be automatically redressed.
Your applicant sought information under Right to Information Act 2005 ,that what action was taken by M. D. U.P.P.C.L on the aforesaid submitted grievance but nothing was made available by public information officer of UPPCL. Please take a glance of attached documents with this representation.
5-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that when the public information officer in the key office of UPPCL takes under teeth the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 ,then think about the subordinate offices of Uttar Pradesh power corporation limited. In the similar manner executive engineer ,EDD II Mirzapur didn’t provide access to information to your appellant. Rule of law advocates the supremacy of law but here what is going on is sheer anarchy. Whether our public functionaries are not making mockery of law of land. Whether such cryptic dealings are not lowering the dignity of public institutions.
Prof. de-Smith explain its content: “that laws as enacted by Parliament be faithfully
executed by officials; that orders of courts should be obeyed; that individuals wishing to
enforce the law should have reasonable access to the courts; that no person should be
condemned unheard, and that power should not be arbitrarily exercised.”3 As Wade4 says
that the rule of law requires the government should be subject to law, rather than the law
subject to the government.
UPSIC always remained failed in regard to performance of its duty which is the root cause of failure of Right to Information Act 2005 in the state.
This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook the rights of citizenry by delivering services in arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap benefit of loopholes in system and depriving poor citizens from right to justice. Therefore it is need of hour to take concrete steps in order to curb grown anarchy in the system. For this your applicant shall ever pray you Hon’ble Sir.